Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court issued a mandatory reminder, rather than a gentle reminder that it is essential to emphasise that in cases involving offences of serious nature, particularly those falling under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, no form of mediation is permissible.
by Amrut Anil Joshi† and Anand Ratnakar Pai††
“One has to appreciate and imagine the trauma, stress, the agony of the child, who was only three years of age, that she would have gone through after being kidnapped by the kidnappers from the lawful guardianship of her parents.”
“No party shall oppose each other’s marks or object to the same, in any manner, so long as the same are in compliance with the terms of this settlement.”
“There is no prohibition to effect a partition otherwise than through an instrument in writing by duly complying with the requirement of law.”
The Delhi High Court observed that Cinema Ventures Private Limited, the defaulting entity, neither filed the undertaking as assured to the court nor made any payment but rather continued to be in the possession of the property.
The Karnataka High Court strictly admonished the petitioner for abusing every jurisdiction of law but refused to impose exemplary costs as the same would only increase the agony of the petitioner, whose marriage was annulled albeit with consent.
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited, seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement, passing off,
Bombay High Court: In a case filed for quashing of the charges registered against Binoy Kodiyeri (petitioner), son of CPM’s
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant petition wherein the Court was faced with the issue
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Nikhil Chawla (‘plaintiff’) for its brand COOK STUDIO in the nature of threat application
Delhi High Court: In a case pending for 5 years before Court, the parties finally reached compromise and sought quashing
Delhi High Court: In a case relating to two marks being ‘Theobroma’ (‘defendant’) and Theos (‘plaintiff’), based out of Bombay and Delhi
Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI): The proceedings against Varun Beverages’ Ravi Kant Jaipuria came to an end after a settlement of
A coram of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Shreesha Merla (Technical member) and Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) has held that non-payment of TDS
Delhi High Court: Stating that, cases under Section 376 of Penal Code, 1860 should not be quashed and should not be taken
Karnataka High Court: M Nagaprasanna, J., quashed the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.87 of 2022 of Byadarahalli Police Station pending
“If clever drafting of the plaint has created the illusion of a cause of action, the court will nip it in the bud at the earliest so that bogus litigation will end at the earlier stage.”
Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that a consent decree cannot be modified/ altered unless
Allahabad High Court: Rajeev Singh, J., reiterated that under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, an FIR i.e. First Information Report